Overexposed the film - advice for development needed

[Craig]

I was shooting some 8x10 HP5+ on the weekend and realized part way through that my meter was set to 100, not 400. Naturally, it was a low contrast scene shot on an overcast day, so I know that overexposing and underdeveloping is exactly the wrong thing to do.

My one saving grace might be that it was a 4 second exposure, and I didn't add any compensation for reciprocity failure. If I read the exposure compensation chart right, I'm probably just about right for normal development. Any agreement/disagreement with that? I was planning to develop in Xtol in a Jobo, other suggestions welcome. Should I be using a lower energy developer, such as Perceptol? Dilute Rodenal?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I would recommend a developer that by itself adds a brilliant tonality to the film, such as Developer 12 from Photographers' Formulary.
First of all, base exposure is best at around EI 200 with HP5+ and this developer, so you'd be only one stop overexposed.
This developer is best used replenished, but can be used diluted as well. Edwal 10 would also be giving you a similar look, and since you're shooting 8x10 the increased grain compared to dev 12 would matter not at all.
Rodinal also doesn't give very good shadow detail, so maybe process your negative normally at 1+25 dilution? That way you keep the shadows suppressed, but you'd bring the highlights up.

 

[cliveh]

I was shooting some 8x10 HP5+ on the weekend and realized part way through that my meter was set to 100, not 400. Naturally, it was a low contrast scene shot on an overcast day, so I know that overexposing and underdeveloping is exactly the wrong thing to do.

My one saving grace might be that it was a 4 second exposure, and I didn't add any compensation for reciprocity failure. If I read the exposure compensation chart right, I'm probably just about right for normal development. Any agreement/disagreement with that? I was planning to develop in Xtol in a Jobo, other suggestions welcome. Should I be using a lower energy developer, such as Perceptol? Dilute Rodenal?

I would suggest you increase the development time by about 20%

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The latitude of most films is from 4-1/2 over to 1 stop under exposure. Just develop the film normally. Negatives will be a bit denser than usual but will print correctly. By attempting to compensate by reducing development time you will effect the negative's contrast and tonality. BTW, many people normally over expose by 1 stop for the very purpose of better tonality.

 

[Craig75]

you should have nailed it -those two stops will balance out forgetting reciprocity compensation.

 

[ckuwajima]

you should have nailed it -those two stops will balance out forgetting reciprocity compensation.

The metering was 4s for ASA100, or 1s for ASA400. Eyeballing the reciprocity failure compensation curve, it would be a bit less than (12.5/5)*1=2.5s.
I would say that it was overexposed somewhere 1/3 and 2/3 stop.

 

[Craig]

The metering was 4s for ASA100, or 1s for ASA400.

Metered exposure was 4s F45 @ ASA 100.

 

[Craig]

you should have nailed it -those two stops will balance out forgetting reciprocity compensation.

That's sort of my gut feel too. I'm mixing a fresh batch of Xtol and I will find out! I realized the meter setting error while I was there, so I have a sheet at the "correct" exposure too. I'll develop them one at a time and see what I get. I have 3 sheets in total of the same scene (plus digital for insurance!)

 

[removed account4]

hi craig
xtol can sometimes be a flat developer, i think you will be fine.
good luck !
john

 

[pentaxuser]

hi craig
xtol can sometimes be a flat developer, i think you will be fine.
good luck !
john

When is it a flat developer and under what circumstances i.e. how can it be made to develop flat?
Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[removed account4]

hi pentaxuser
it was kind of an inside joke.
every time i use xtol, (for years) all i got were flat negatives.
i over exposed, i over processed, it never gave me contrast.
(caffenol can sometimes do the same thing, that is why i spike
caffneol with a little print developer.)
so to answer your question, under what circumstances will it give flat negatives
my answer ( from MY experience ) is all the time

that said, i agree with jerry, that craig's exposure wasn't badly off and processing as if it was normal film in xtol would
give perfectly printable negatives.

 

[Arvee]

The latitude of most films is from 4-1/2 over to 1 stop under exposure. Just develop the film normally. Negatives will be a bit denser than usual but will print correctly. By attempting to compensate by reducing development time you will effect the negative's contrast and tonality. BTW, many people normally over expose by 1 stop for the very purpose of better tonality.

+1

 

[markbarendt]

Develop normally.

 

[Craig]

I will run it as normal and see what I get. Thanks for the advice.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

A 4 second exposure with that film only needs an additional 2 seconds to get it back on track. As far as development goes, if it were me, I'd just develop for your normal time. You'll still have a printable negative... hey, you may have even stumbled onto something special!

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks jnanian. I have heard of the Church of Rodinal so is caffenol a break-away movement for the Church of java? That's Sam Spade's "java" and not the place where a volcano exploded

pentaxuser

 

[removed account4]

Thanks jnanian. I have heard of the Church of Rodinal so is caffenol a break-away movement for the Church of java? That's Sam Spade's "java" and not the place where a volcano exploded

pentaxuser

not sure if it is a church, maybe a "café or clutch"

 

[Craig]

I ran the negatives tonight, and they look good. A little darker than I would normally develop to, but a full range of tones and good shadow detail without the highlights being baked. At least that's my impression from holding them up as they came out of the wash, I have not tried printing one, but I think they will print well.

I shot it with my digital camera as well, this is the scene:

On the negatives I have preserved the detail in the trees behind the bridge, and under the stone arch.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Is that the old CPR trestle near the Spiral Tunnels?

 

[Craig]

Yes it is. A few miles east of Field.